Address · Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
50 St Joseph St
- Communications on those registrations
- 0
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Location
- 43.66636, -79.38889
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM19995 | Pemberton Group Inc. | 50 St. Joseph Street | Planning and Development Application, Minor Variance | 9 January 2014 – 31 December 2014 | 0 |
| SM11785 | St Joseph & Bay Land Corporation | 50 St. Joseph Street | Planning Application,Zoning, Official Plan Amendmet, Site Plant | 29 May 2008 – 19 March 2015 | 0 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
1- Submitted 3 October 2013Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 13 245781 STE 27 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 1 row
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 13 245781 STE 27 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 3 October 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
Linked lobbying registrations
No published links to development or Committee of Adjustment applications.
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), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 2 rows
| 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.