Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 19 240440 STE 12 SA

859 Eglinton Ave W; 861 Eglinton Ave W; 875 Eglinton Ave W

Ward 12 · Josh MatlowDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 24 October 2019; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 859 Eglinton Ave W; 861 Eglinton Ave W; 875 Eglinton Ave W
Ward: Ward 12 · Josh Matlow
Submitted: 24 October 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: 390 units; 1,000 m² gross floor area
Related file: 16 198806 STE 21 OZ

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

Description

Site Plan Approval Application for a proposed 17-storey mixed-use building containing 1000 square metres of non-residential gross floor area and 390 residential dwelling units.

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.

CentreCourt
SM27002 · 13 November 2018 · “859 Eglinton Avenue West”
CentreCourt
SM25263 · 6 November 2017 · “875 Eglinton Avenue West.”
CentreCourt
SM25031 · 13 September 2017 · “875 Eglinton Avenue West.”
Deaj Properties
SM18258 · 10 July 2012 · “875 Eglinton Avenue West”
Upper Village Investments Limited
SM16144 · 11 April 2011 · “875 Eglinton Avenue West”

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 12

32 lobbied · 72 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied511

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=4
Matched, unlobbied100% n=7

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied3%
Matched, unlobbied0%

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 12: 32 lobbied and 72 matched unlobbied applications in 23 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	32	—	100% (n=4)	0%	3%	0.00
Matched, unlobbied	72	511	100% (n=7)	0%	0%	0.05

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.