100 Union St

RegistrationsApplicationsReport an error on this page

Registrations naming this address: 2; 2 client organisations
Communications on those registrations: 0
Applications at this address: 2; No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items: 0; Items naming this address

About this address

Ward: Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
Location: 43.67644, -79.46752
How this address was located: Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.

Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points

Registrations that mention this address

These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.

Registrations by communications

Uniq EntertainmentSM32185 · 9 August 20210
578602 Ontario IncSM29777 · 16 February 20200

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

No communications recorded.

All registrations· 2 rows

Registration	Client	As written	Subject matter	Dates	Communications
SM32185	Uniq Entertainment	100 Union Street.	Planning and Development Application; Official Plan	9 August 2021 – 1 March 2027	0
SM29777	578602 Ontario Inc	100 Union Street	Planning and Development; Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Develop…	16 February 2020 – 30 November 2026	0

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

Submitted 24 August 2022Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 22 195273 STE 09 SAUnder Review · In progress
Submitted 22 June 2022Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 22 166048 STE 09 OZUnder Review · In progress

Data table· 2 rows

Application	Type	Submitted	Status
22 195273 STE 09 SA Development application	Site Plan Approval (SA)	24 August 2022	Under Review In progress
22 166048 STE 09 OZ Development application	Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)	22 June 2022	Under Review In progress

Linked lobbying registrations

No published links to development or Committee of Adjustment applications.

Council and committee items naming this address

None.

Comparison with similar applications

Development 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 9

20 lobbied · 21 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=4
Matched, unlobbied100% n=5

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=63
Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

Lobbied4%
Matched, unlobbied3%

Data table· 4 rows

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 9: 20 lobbied and 21 matched unlobbied applications in 12 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	20	—	100% (n=4)	0%	0%	0.05
Matched, unlobbied	21	—	100% (n=5)	0%	0%	0.10

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.

Development applications

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 9

19 lobbied · 28 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=78
Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

Lobbied12%
Matched, unlobbied14%

Data table· 4 rows

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 9: 19 lobbied and 28 matched unlobbied applications in 16 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	19	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.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	571	—	100% (n=78)	0%	12%	0.08
Matched, unlobbied	760	—	96% (n=78)	4%	14%	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.

Lobbyists choose whom to contact, so a difference does not show a change of mind.