Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 17 108913 STE 28 SA

Ward 10 · Ausma MalikDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: NOAC Issued; Approved
Submitted: 25 January 2017; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 1 Yonge St; 7 Yonge St; 11 Yonge St
Ward: Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted: 25 January 2017
Status: NOAC Issued
Outcome recorded: Approved
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Related file: 13 129256 STE 10 OZ

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

Description

A site plan application for Phase 2 that contemplates a 95-storey, 307 metre high mixed-use building. Part of the Lower Yonge Precinct Master Plan and Phase 2 of a 5 Phase development.

Linked lobbying registrations

No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.

Pinnacle International
SM34316 · 27 March 2023 · “1 Yonge St”
Pinnacle International (Seven Yonge) Ltd.
SM26905 · 26 October 2018 · “7 Yonge Street”
Pinnacle International
SM26093 · 20 April 2018 · “7 Yonge Street”
Mondiale Development LTD.
SM18725 · 5 December 2012 · “1 Yonge Street”
Pinnacle Internation Group
SM18743 · 3 December 2012 · “1 Yonge Street”
Pinnacle International
SM18737 · 30 November 2012 · “1 Yonge Street”
Pinnacle International
SM18712 · 23 November 2012 · “1 Yonge Street”
Osmington Inc.
SM17882 · 8 March 2012 · “1 Yonge Street”

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 10

66 lobbied · 165 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied1,881

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=5
Matched, unlobbied100% n=11

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied3%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 10: 66 lobbied and 165 matched unlobbied applications in 37 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	66	—	100% (n=5)	0%	3%	0.05
Matched, unlobbied	165	1,881	100% (n=11)	0%	2%	0.04

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.