Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
110 Adelaide St E
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.65170, -79.37355
- 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
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
1These 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
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Toronto Building | City staff | 2 | 0 | 24 October 2023 |
All registrations· 1 row
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM34905 | 110 Adelaide Street East Inc. | 110 Adelaide Street East | Planning and Development; Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Develop… | 10 October 2023 – 20 April 2025 | 2 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 4 August 2022Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 22 186104 STE 13 SAAppeal Received · In progress
- Submitted 28 February 2020Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 20 120404 STE 13 OZOMB Appeal · In progress
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 186104 STE 13 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 4 August 2022 | Appeal Received In progress |
| 20 120404 STE 13 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 28 February 2020 | OMB Appeal In progress |
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
110 Adelaide St E · Site Plan Approval (SA)
22 186104 STE 13 SA · submitted 4 August 2022 · Appeal Received · from registration SM34905 (110 Adelaide Street East Inc.)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.92
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM34905: 110 Adelaide Street East, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 22 186104 STE 13 SA at 110 Adelaide St E: The Site Plan application to permit a 65-storey mixed use building containing 600 residential dwelling units, 330 square metres of office space, and 400 square metres of retail space. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 110 Adelaide Street East, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 110 ADELAIDE ST E
- application_address
- 110 ADELAIDE ST E
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 13
56 lobbied · 128 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
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 | 56 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 7% | 0.16 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 128 | — | 100% (n=8) | 0% | 2% | 0.01 |
| 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
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 13
82 lobbied · 96 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 82 | — | 100% (n=13) | 0% | 11% | 0.15 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 96 | — | 90% (n=14) | 10% | 16% | 0.08 |
| 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.
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.