Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 18 201853 NNY 26 OZ
215 Laird Dr; 815 Eglinton Ave E; 825 Eglinton Ave E; 835 Eglinton Ave E; 845 Eglinton Ave E
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 30 July 2018
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 215 Laird Dr; 815 Eglinton Ave E; 825 Eglinton Ave E; 835 Eglinton Ave E; 845 Eglinton Ave E
- Ward
- Ward 15 · Rachel Chernos Lin
- Submitted
- 30 July 2018
- 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
- 1,672 units
- Related file
- 16 210199 NNY 26 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The proposal is for the redevelopment of the existing 8.8 acre site with a total density of 3.87. The proposal includes 5,708.7 m2 of retail, 5-storey office (9,655 m2), 116,252 of residential (1,672 units), a new public park (0.32 ha), community and daycare spaces (2,100 m2) and a network of public and private streets. The proposal includes 10, 10, 18 and 21-storey buildings along Laird Drive and Eglinton Avenue East and buildings at 29 and 34-storeys in height towards the east end of the site.
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
RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust · registration SM27592
Assisting with the development of 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.88
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 SM27592: Assisting with the development of 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 201853 NNY 26 OZ at 845 Eglinton Ave E: The proposal is for the redevelopment of the existing 8.8 acre site with a total density of 3.87. The proposal includes 5,708.7 m2 of retail, 5-storey office (9,655 m2), 116,252 of residential (1,672 units), a new public park (0.32 ha), community and daycare spaces (2,100 m2) and a network of publi… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assisting with the development of 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East
Matched fields
- address
- 815-845 EGLINTON AVE E
- application_address
- 815 EGLINTON AVE E
RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust · registration SM24061
Development application for 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East.
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.88
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 SM24061: Development application for 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 201853 NNY 26 OZ at 845 Eglinton Ave E: The proposal is for the redevelopment of the existing 8.8 acre site with a total density of 3.87. The proposal includes 5,708.7 m2 of retail, 5-storey office (9,655 m2), 116,252 of residential (1,672 units), a new public park (0.32 ha), community and daycare spaces (2,100 m2) and a network of publi… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development application for 815-845 Eglinton Avenue East.
Matched fields
- address
- 815-845 EGLINTON AVE E
- application_address
- 815 EGLINTON AVE E
Lobbying on linked registrations
2 linked registrations · 15 communications · 8 meetings · 3 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 26 Don Valley West | Member of council | 13 | 6 | 1 March 2018 |
| Engineering & Construction Services | City staff | 1 | 1 | 2 December 2019 |
| Ward 15 Don Valley West | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 8 October 2019 |
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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 15
20 lobbied · 36 matchedApproval 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 | 20 | — | 100% (n=2) | 0% | 10% | 0.05 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 36 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 25% | 0.01 |
| 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.