Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
154 Front Street East
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.65030, -79.36878
- How this address was located
- Matched to the nearest civic number on the same street in the City's address points. Matched address: 156 FRONT ST E (2 civic numbers away).
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
2These 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· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Office of Councillor McConnell | Councillor staff | 3 | 0 | 6 January 2012 |
| Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 30 November 2010 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM27319 | FMC Front Street Developments Inc. | 154 Front Street East | Building Permits | 10 January 2019 – 31 December 2019 | 0 |
| SM15484 | Cityzen Development Group | 154 Front Street East | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B… | 30 November 2010 – 30 June 2014 | 4 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
5- Submitted 17 June 2021Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 21 172017 STE 13 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 23 May 2017Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0592/17TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 3 October 2011Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 11 286296 STE 28 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 March 2011Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 11 146719 STE 28 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 March 2011Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 11 146730 STE 28 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 5 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 172017 STE 13 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 17 June 2021 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| A0592/17TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 23 May 2017 | Closed Approved |
| 11 286296 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 3 October 2011 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 11 146719 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 16 March 2011 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 11 146730 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 16 March 2011 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
154 Front St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
11 146719 STE 28 OZ · submitted 16 March 2011 · Closed · from registration SM15484 (Cityzen Development Group)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM15484: Development applications for 154 Front Street East (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 146719 STE 28 OZ at 154 Front St E: Revised Rezoning and Site Plan Approval application for construction of 2 towers atop one podium. Podium height ranges from 3 to 9 storeys; west tower is 22 storeys overall and east tower is 26 storeys overall; Retail at grade; 5 levels of below grade parking with 284 parking spaces and 33 visitor … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development applications for 154 Front Street East
Matched fields
- address
- 154 FRONT ST E
- application_address
- 154 FRONT ST E
154 Front St E · Site Plan Approval (SA)
11 146730 STE 28 SA · submitted 16 March 2011 · Closed · from registration SM15484 (Cityzen Development Group)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.78
A model scored this link between 0.7 and 0.9 out of 1. Links are not checked by a person, and links in this range are wrong more often: check the evidence before relying on it.
Source records
- Registration SM15484: Development applications for 154 Front Street East (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 11 146730 STE 28 SA at 154 Front St E: Revised Rezoning and Site Plan Approval application for construction of 2 towers atop one podium. Podium height ranges from 3 to 9 storeys; west tower is 22 storeys overall and east tower is 26 storeys overall; Retail at grade; 5 levels of below grade parking with 284 parking spaces and 33 visitor … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Development applications for 154 Front Street East
Matched fields
- address
- 154 FRONT ST E
- application_address
- 154 FRONT 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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 13
4 lobbied · 23 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 4 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 23 | 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 | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
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.
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 13
5 lobbied · 76 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 76 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. 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.
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.