Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
333 King St E
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.65155, -79.36593
- 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
0These 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.
None.
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
No communications recorded.
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 18 July 2018Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 18 196225 STE 28 OZCouncil Approved · Approved
- Submitted 15 March 2013Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 13 134203 STE 28 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 28 March 2012Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 12 144494 STE 28 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 196225 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 18 July 2018 | Council Approved Approved |
| 13 134203 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 15 March 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 12 144494 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 28 March 2012 | 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
333 King St E · Site Plan Approval (SA)
13 134203 STE 28 SA · submitted 15 March 2013 · Closed · from registration SM19086 (First Gulf Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.82
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 SM19086: Redevelopment of portions of the site known municipally as 333 and 351 King St. East. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 13 134203 STE 28 SA at 333 King St E: This is a Gold Star Site Plan Control application for a proposed a 17-storey office tower at 351 King Street East with a 5 storey podium and retail uses at grade. The proposal comprises 46,520 m2 of non-residential Gross Floor Area, of which 44,532 m2 is for office use and 1,988 m2 is for retail us… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of portions of the site known municipally as 333 and 351 King St. East.
Matched fields
- address
- 351 KING ST E
- application_address
- 351 KING ST E
333 King St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
12 144494 STE 28 OZ · submitted 28 March 2012 · Closed · from registration SM19086 (First Gulf Developments)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.80
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 SM19086: Redevelopment of portions of the site known municipally as 333 and 351 King St. East. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 12 144494 STE 28 OZ at 333 King St E: Rezoning and site plan approval applications for former Toronto Sun property for a 17-storey office building on the east portion of the site and a 12-storey office building in the southwest corner. All existing buildings on the property to be retained and restricted to their existing heights and th… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Redevelopment of portions of the site known municipally as 333 and 351 King St. East.
Matched fields
- address
- 351 KING ST E
- application_address
- 351 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.
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.
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.