Address · Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
674 Bay St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Location
- 43.65743, -79.38470
- How this address was located
- Matched to the nearest civic number on the same street in the City's address points. Matched address: 686 BAY ST (12 civic numbers away).
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
2- Submitted 9 September 2008Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 08 201761 STE 27 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 7 July 2008Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 08 178797 STE 27 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08 201761 STE 27 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 9 September 2008 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 08 178797 STE 27 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 7 July 2008 | 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
674 Bay St · Site Plan Approval (SA)
08 201761 STE 27 SA · submitted 9 September 2008 · Closed · from registration SM12223 (The Hospital for Sick Children)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.79
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 SM12223: 674 - 686 Bay St., 72 - 74 Elm St., 85 - 87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 08 201761 STE 27 SA at 674 Bay St: Rezoning application to permit the existing lands to be developed and used for the purposes of a 24-storey research and educational development facility for purposes related to the operations of The Hospital for Sick Children. The development includes grade related retail and service uses, 269 seat… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 674 - 686 Bay St., 72 - 74 Elm St., 85 - 87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane
Matched fields
- address
- 674-686 BAY ST
- application_address
- 674 BAY ST
674 Bay St · Site Plan Approval (SA)
08 201761 STE 27 SA · submitted 9 September 2008 · Closed · from registration SM13000 (The Hospital for Sick Children)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.77
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 SM13000: 674-686 Bay St., 72-74 Elm St., 85-87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 08 201761 STE 27 SA at 674 Bay St: Rezoning application to permit the existing lands to be developed and used for the purposes of a 24-storey research and educational development facility for purposes related to the operations of The Hospital for Sick Children. The development includes grade related retail and service uses, 269 seat… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 674-686 Bay St., 72-74 Elm St., 85-87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane
Matched fields
- address
- 674-686 BAY ST
- application_address
- 674 BAY ST
674 Bay St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
08 178797 STE 27 OZ · submitted 7 July 2008 · Closed · from registration SM13000 (The Hospital for Sick Children)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.76
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 SM13000: 674-686 Bay St., 72-74 Elm St., 85-87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 08 178797 STE 27 OZ at 674 Bay St: Rezoning application to permit the existing lands to be developed and used for the purposes of a 24-storey research and educational development facility for purposes related to the operations of The Hospital for Sick Children. The development includes grade related retail and service uses, 269 seat… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 674-686 Bay St., 72-74 Elm St., 85-87 Walton St., a portion of Barnaby Lane
Matched fields
- address
- 674-686 BAY ST
- application_address
- 674 BAY ST
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 11
46 lobbied · 113 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 | 46 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 9% | 0.09 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 113 | — | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.02 |
| 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 11
69 lobbied · 60 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 | 69 | — | 100% (n=10) | 0% | 10% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 60 | — | 100% (n=4) | 0% | 11% | 0.03 |
| 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.