Address · Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
290 Old Weston Rd
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 9 · Alejandra Bravo
- Location
- 43.67205, -79.46284
- 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
4These 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· 5 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 9 Davenport | Member of council | 12 | 6 | 6 October 2022 |
| Ward 17 Davenport | Member of council | 11 | 8 | 16 July 2018 |
| Ward 11 York South-Weston | Member of council | 5 | 2 | 25 May 2017 |
| Office of Councillor Bailao | Councillor staff | 2 | 2 | 10 January 2019 |
| Ward 17 Davenport | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 29 May 2017 |
All registrations· 4 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM31323 | I2 Developments Inc (Old Weston) | 290 Old Weston Road | Planning and Development, Planning Policy / Study; Planning and Development Application, Site Plan;… | 1 March 2021 – 30 November 2022 | 0 |
| SM23128 | I2 Developments Inc. | 290 Old Weston Road | Planning and Development Application, Site Plan | 2 June 2016 – 31 December 2026 | 29 |
| SM22439 | I2 Developments (Old Weston) Inc. | 290 Old Weston Rd. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 5 November 2015 – 21 August 2023 | 2 |
| SM14427 | Junction Lofts Inc. | 290 Old Weston Road | Planning and Development, Rental Housing Demolition or Conversion | 14 May 2010 – 14 November 2010 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 29 April 2026Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0369/26TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 29 April 2022Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 22 140254 STE 09 SAUnder Review · In progress
- Submitted 17 July 2020Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 20 169194 STE 09 OZOMB Approved · Approved
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0369/26TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 29 April 2026 | Closed Approved |
| 22 140254 STE 09 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 29 April 2022 | Under Review In progress |
| 20 169194 STE 09 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 17 July 2020 | OMB Approved Approved |
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
290 Old Weston Rd · Site Plan Approval (SA)
22 140254 STE 09 SA · submitted 29 April 2022 · Under Review · from registration SM31323 (I2 Developments Inc (Old Weston))
Evidence High confidence · score 0.96
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 SM31323: 290 Old Weston Road Development Application. MCR Request filed. Development under appeal to LPAT. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 22 140254 STE 09 SA at 290 Old Weston Rd: Site Plan Approval for a 27-storey residential building having a residential gross floor area of 22,450 square metres, and a 6-storey non-residential building having a gross floor area of 1960 square metres. 321 residential dwelling units are proposed on the lot. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 290 Old Weston Road Development Application. MCR Request filed. Development under appeal to LPAT.
Matched fields
- address
- 290 OLD WESTON RD
- application_address
- 290 OLD WESTON RD
290 Old Weston Rd · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
20 169194 STE 09 OZ · submitted 17 July 2020 · OMB Approved · from registration SM31323 (I2 Developments Inc (Old Weston))
Evidence High confidence · score 0.96
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 SM31323: 290 Old Weston Road Development Application. MCR Request filed. Development under appeal to LPAT. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 20 169194 STE 09 OZ at 290 Old Weston Rd: Proposal for a 29-storey mixed-use building, including a 6-storey base building. This redevelopment would result in a total gross floor area 24410 square metres, including 1960square metres of commercial office space and 321 residential units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 290 Old Weston Road Development Application. MCR Request filed. Development under appeal to LPAT.
Matched fields
- address
- 290 OLD WESTON RD
- application_address
- 290 OLD WESTON RD
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
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 9
27 lobbied · 333 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
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 | 27 | 169 | 67% (n=27) | 33% | 26% | 29% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 333 | 134 | 95% (n=279) | 5% | 6% | 30% |
| 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 9
20 lobbied · 21 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,237 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| 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=4) | 0% | 0% | 0.10 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=61) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,237 | 727 | 97% (n=96) | 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 9
19 lobbied · 28 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
573 lobbied · 763 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| 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. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 573 | 1,925 | 100% (n=64) | 0% | 13% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 763 | 1,793 | 98% (n=70) | 2% | 13% | 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.