Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 19 137676 NNY 16 SA
10 Inn on The Park Dr; 1091 Leslie St; 1095 Leslie St.
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 9 April 2019
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 10 Inn on The Park Dr; 1091 Leslie St; 1095 Leslie St.
- Ward
- Ward 16 · Jon Burnside
- Submitted
- 9 April 2019
- 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
- 251 units; 33,252 m² gross floor area
- Related file
- 15 108593 NNY 25 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Tower A is a 33 storey (133m) residential building containing 251 dwelling units and a gross floor area of approximately 33,252 sqm. A total of 312 parking spaces are proposed to be located below grade. A total of 303 bicycle parking spaces are provided for visitor and resident use located on the main floor. The building provides a 5 storey podium with indoor and outdoor amenities located on the 5th floor.
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
Deltera Inc. · registration SM20027
Development Site at 1095 Leslie St. at Eglinton, Auberge on the Park Planning and Development Application, Official Plan, Zoning By-law, Site Plan
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.79
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 SM20027: Development Site at 1095 Leslie St. at Eglinton, Auberge on the Park Planning and Development Application, Official Plan, Zoning By-law, Site Plan (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 137676 NNY 16 SA at 1091 Leslie St: Tower A is a 33 storey (133m) residential building containing 251 dwelling units and a gross floor area of approximately 33,252 sqm. A total of 312 parking spaces are proposed to be located below grade. A total of 303 bicycle parking spaces are provided for visitor and resident use located on the m… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development Site at 1095 Leslie St. at Eglinton, Auberge on the Park Planning and Development Application, Official Plan, Zoning By-law, Site Plan
Matched fields
- address
- 1095 LESLIE ST
- application_address
- 1095 LESLIE ST
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 36 communications · 36 meetings · 17 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 17 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 26 Don Valley West | Member of council | 4 | 4 | 29 March 2017 |
| Councillor Jaye Robinson | Councillor staff | 3 | 3 | 28 March 2017 |
| Councillor McMahon | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 19 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 24 Willowdale | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 25 Don Valley West | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 29 Toronto-Danforth | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 33 Don Valley East | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 34 Don Valley East | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 37 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 38 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 5 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 6 Etobicoke-Lakeshore | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Ward 9 York Centre | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 29 March 2017 |
| Jon Burnside | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 10 February 2023 |
| Councillor Jaye Robison | Councillor staff | 1 | 1 | 28 March 2017 |
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 16
10 lobbied · 23 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 10 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 23 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 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.