Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
2 Toronto St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.64969, -79.37617
- 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
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· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor Pam McConnell, Ward 28 | Councillor staff | 2 | 0 | 27 July 2017 |
| Offfice of Councillor McConnell, Ward 28 | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 8 December 2016 |
| Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 27 April 2016 |
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM22977 | Larco Investments | 2 Toronto Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 8 April 2016 – 29 November 2018 | 3 |
| SM22973 | Larco Investments | 2 Toronto Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 7 April 2016 – 7 April 2022 | 2 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 19 September 2017Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 17 235087 STE 28 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 20 May 2016Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 16 159562 STE 28 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17 235087 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 19 September 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 16 159562 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 20 May 2016 | 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
34 King St E · Site Plan Approval (SA)
17 235087 STE 28 SA · submitted 19 September 2017 · Closed · from registration SM22977 (Larco Investments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
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 SM22977: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 17 235087 STE 28 SA at 34 King St E: INACTIVE Revised Site Plan Approval application to construct a 33-storey mixed use office and residential tower with ground floor retail uses containing 219 dwelling units, 9,895 sq.m office GFA, and 293.0 sq.m. retail GFA. This application is associated with the Tribunal approved rezoning, file no… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street
Matched fields
- address
- 50 KING ST E
- application_address
- 50 KING ST E
36 King St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 159562 STE 28 OZ · submitted 20 May 2016 · Closed · from registration SM22973 (Larco Investments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.88
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 SM22973: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 159562 STE 28 OZ at 36 King St E: Rezoning application to permit a 33-storey mixed use office and residential building with ground floor retail. The proposal include 219 residential rental units, 10,1871 square metres of non-residentail space, 77 parking spaces in a 5-level underground garage, and 269 bicycle parking spaces. The pr… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street
Matched fields
- address
- 50 KING ST E
- application_address
- 50 KING ST E
36 King St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
16 159562 STE 28 OZ · submitted 20 May 2016 · Closed · from registration SM22977 (Larco Investments)
Evidence High confidence · score 0.90
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 SM22977: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 159562 STE 28 OZ at 36 King St E: Rezoning application to permit a 33-storey mixed use office and residential building with ground floor retail. The proposal include 219 residential rental units, 10,1871 square metres of non-residentail space, 77 parking spaces in a 5-level underground garage, and 269 bicycle parking spaces. The pr… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Planning matters relating to the development of 34-36 and 50 King Street East and 2 Toronto Street
Matched fields
- address
- 50 KING ST E
- application_address
- 50 KING 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.