Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Development application 21 172637 STE 14 OZ
21 Don Valley Parkway; 375 Eastern Ave; 385 Eastern Ave
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 18 June 2021
- No appeal recorded
- Communications on linked registrations
- 0
Application record
- Type
- Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
- Addresses
- 21 Don Valley Parkway; 375 Eastern Ave; 385 Eastern Ave
- Ward
- Ward 14 · Paula Fletcher
- Submitted
- 18 June 2021
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Related file
- 15 236783 STE 30 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
The East Harbour Transit Oriented Community (TOC) proposal was approved in 2022 through a Minister's Zoning Order (MZO-O.Reg. 329/22) as part of the Provincial Transit Oriented Communities Program. The MZO introduced 302,000 sqm of residential permissions to the existing 926,000 sqm of non-residential, for a total of 1,228,000 sqm of development permissions. The addition of residential permissions is a change from the approved planning framework completed in 2018 which envisions an office employment hub. The proposal comprises 9 office towers ranging from 31-48 storeys in height, and 9 residential towers ranging from 23-65 storeys in height, adjacent to the future East Harbour transit hub. Public consultation for the East Harbour TOC proposal was proponent-led. It included 3 Local Advisory Committee (LAC) meetings, 4 virtual Open House and 14,000 information mailer-sheets to residents in adjacent communities, directing them to the consultation website, called 'Engage East Harbour'. City staff and the local Councillor participated in all public consultation sessions hosted by the developer, Cadillac Fairview.This application is related to the subdivision application 16 270078 STE 30 SB which was approved in 2024.
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.
- Colliers InternationalSM20112 · 24 February 2014 · “21 Don Valley Parkway”
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 14
18 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 18 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 28 | 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 | 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.