lobbyTO

Address · Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe

150 Bloor St W

Registrations naming this address
5
3 client organisations
Communications on those registrations
0
Applications at this address
1
No published links to lobbying
Council and committee items
0
Items naming this address

About this address

Ward
Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
Location
43.66919, -79.39355
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

5

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

Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address

No communications recorded.

All registrations· 5 rows
RegistrationClientAs writtenSubject matterDatesCommunications
SM13073MTCC#626150 Bloor Street WestPlanning and Development Application, Minor Variance, Rezoning5 June 2009 – 5 March 20120
SM13075MTCC#626150 Bloor Street WestPlanning and Development Application, Minor Variance, Rezoning14 May 20090
SM11159Metro Toronto Condominium Corporation 626150 Bloor Street WestPlanning and Development- Planning Act Applications - Zoning By-law21 February 2008 – 21 February 20090
SM11413Metro Toronto Condominium Corporation 626150 Bloor Street WestPlanning and Development - Planning Act Applications - Zoning By-law for property21 February 2008 – 21 February 20090
SM11087Northam Realty Advisors Limited150 Bloor Street WestMinor variance and site plan applications15 February 2008 – 31 December 20080

Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address

1
Data table· 1 row
ApplicationTypeSubmittedStatus
09 117053 STE 27 OZ
Development application
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)13 March 2009Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)

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.

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 11

69 lobbied · 60 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=10
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=4

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied10%
  • Matched, unlobbied11%

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 11: 69 lobbied and 60 matched unlobbied applications in 31 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied69—100% (n=10)0%10%0.04
Matched, unlobbied60—100% (n=4)0%11%0.03
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—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.