Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 14 267350 STE 27 OZ
1 Grosvenor St; 7 Grosvenor St; 480 Yonge St; 484 Yonge St; 484-488 Yonge St; 490 Yonge St; 492 Yonge St
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 23 December 2014
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 1 Grosvenor St; 7 Grosvenor St; 480 Yonge St; 484 Yonge St; 484-488 Yonge St; 490 Yonge St; 492 Yonge St
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Submitted
- 23 December 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
- 451 units
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The rezoning application proposes to redevelop the site and build a new mixed-use 38-storey (131 metre including mechanical penthouse) with 2,250 sq. metres of commercial uses in a two-storey base building and residential uses on the upper floors. The existing clock tower will be maintained and incorporated into the redevelopment. There are a total of 451 residential units including 425 condominium units and 26 rental units. Parking for 117 vehicles is proposed on 4.5 levels below grade. 472 bicycle parking spaces are located at ground level and above grade. Access to the site is proposed from St. Luke Lane. The site currently contains 2 to 3-storey mixed use buildings with retail uses and residential rental units above.
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
480 Yonge Street Limited Partnership · registration SM24210
480 to 494 Yonge Street, Toronto
Evidence High confidence · score 0.91
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM24210: 480 to 494 Yonge Street, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 267350 STE 27 OZ at 480 Yonge St: The rezoning application proposes to redevelop the site and build a new mixed-use 38-storey (131 metre including mechanical penthouse) with 2,250 sq. metres of commercial uses in a two-storey base building and residential uses on the upper floors. The existing clock tower will be maintained and inc… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 480 to 494 Yonge Street, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 494 YONGE ST
- application_address
- 1 GROSVENOR ST
480 Yonge Street Limited Partnership · registration SM23888
480-494 Yonge Street, Toronto
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.86
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 SM23888: 480-494 Yonge Street, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 14 267350 STE 27 OZ at 480 Yonge St: The rezoning application proposes to redevelop the site and build a new mixed-use 38-storey (131 metre including mechanical penthouse) with 2,250 sq. metres of commercial uses in a two-storey base building and residential uses on the upper floors. The existing clock tower will be maintained and inc… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 480-494 Yonge Street, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 480-494 YONGE ST
- application_address
- 480 YONGE ST
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 5 communications · 2 meetings · 3 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 27 | Councillor staff | 2 | 0 | 27 March 2017 |
| Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 24 March 2017 |
| Mayor | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 16 March 2017 |
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.
- QuadReal Real Property Group Limited PartnershipSM30640 · 29 September 2020 · “480 Yonge St.”
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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 13
83 lobbied · 97 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 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 | 83 | — | 100% (n=10) | 0% | 11% | 0.14 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 97 | 1,793 | 93% (n=14) | 7% | 17% | 0.08 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (n=70) | 2% | 13% | 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.