Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
46 Colborne St
- Communications on those registrations
- 0
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.64921, -79.37504
- 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
No communications recorded.
All registrations· 2 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM26285 | Tom Jones Steak House Inc., Ontario 485236 Ltd. | 46 Colborne St | Real Estate / Property (City-owned) | 30 May 2018 – 6 June 2018 | 0 |
| SM23172 | Carterra Private Equities Inc. | 46 Colborne St. | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law; Planning and Development, Heritage | 29 May 2016 – 29 May 2017 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 20 June 2018Consent (severance) (CO)Committee of Adjustment application B0060/18TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 10 November 2017Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 17 260753 STE 28 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 30 November 2015Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 15 258720 STE 28 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| B0060/18TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Consent (severance) (CO) | 20 June 2018 | Closed Approved |
| 17 260753 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 10 November 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 15 258720 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 30 November 2015 | 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
71 King St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 258720 STE 28 OZ · submitted 30 November 2015 · Closed · from registration SM23172 (Carterra Private Equities Inc.)
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 SM23172: Assist in rezoning 65-77 King St E and 46 Colborne St. for a 19 storey purpose built office building with ground floor retail. The proposal also incorporates two designated heritage buildings (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 258720 STE 28 OZ at 71 King St E: Proposed 18-storey office development with retail uses at-grade, with a total gross floor area of 37,775 square metres including 1,629 square metres of retail space at grade, which will have frontage on both King Street East and Colborne Street. The main pedestrian entrance to the building will be … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Assist in rezoning 65-77 King St E and 46 Colborne St. for a 19 storey purpose built office building with ground floor retail. The proposal also incorpora…
Matched fields
- address
- 65-77 KING ST E
- application_address
- 65 KING ST E
71 King St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 258720 STE 28 OZ · submitted 30 November 2015 · Closed · from registration SM26285 (Tom Jones Steak House Inc., Ontario 485236 Ltd.)
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 SM26285: Premature closure of Rodega Lane and its effect on 17 Leader Lane / 40 Colborne Street as information provided to City and OMB with respect to adjacent development (65, 71-75, 95 King St E and 46 Colborne St) is incorrect. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 258720 STE 28 OZ at 71 King St E: Proposed 18-storey office development with retail uses at-grade, with a total gross floor area of 37,775 square metres including 1,629 square metres of retail space at grade, which will have frontage on both King Street East and Colborne Street. The main pedestrian entrance to the building will be … (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Premature closure of Rodega Lane and its effect on 17 Leader Lane / 40 Colborne Street as information provided to City and OMB with respect to adjacent development (65, 71-75, 95 King S…
- particulars: …lborne Street as information provided to City and OMB with respect to adjacent development (65, 71-75, 95 King St E and 46 Colborne St) is incorrect.
Matched fields
- address
- 46 COLBORNE ST
- application_address
- 46 COLBORNE ST
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.
Consent (severance) (CO), City-wide
26 lobbied · 179 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 26 | 184 | 79% (n=24) | 21% | 15% | 25% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 179 | 115 | 88% (n=133) | 12% | 3% | 25% |
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.