lobbyTO

Development application · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)

Development application 13 144733 STE 20 OZ

301 King St W; 303 King St W; 305 King St W; 309 King St W; 315 King St W; 317 King St W; 319 King St W

Status
OMB Approved
Approved
Submitted
4 April 2013
Appealed
Linked lobbying registrations
2
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
0
0 meetings · 0 offices

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
301 King St W; 303 King St W; 305 King St W; 309 King St W; 315 King St W; 317 King St W; 319 King St W
Ward
Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted
4 April 2013
Status
OMB Approved
Outcome recorded
Approved
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
Yes
Size stated in the description
403 units

Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page

Description

OLT Approved Application to Amend the Zoning By-law to permit the re-development of the site with a 50-storey (157 metre tall including the mechanical penthouse) mixed-use building containing retail, restaurant and office uses within the first 5 floors and 403 residential units above. A total of 146 parking spaces are proposed within a six level underground parking garage. Portions of the heritage buildings on the site are proposed to be retained and integrated into the podium. This application is being reviewed in conjunction with Site Plan application (File No. 22- 204481 STE 10 SA).

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

Lobbying on linked registrations

2 linked registrations · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations

No communications recorded.

Consultant firms

Linked registrations

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.

None.

Comparison with similar 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 10

88 lobbied · 94 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=7
  • Matched, unlobbied100% n=6

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied11%
  • Matched, unlobbied5%

Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide

573 lobbied · 763 matched

Median days

  • Lobbied1,925
  • Matched, unlobbied1,793

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=64
  • Matched, unlobbied98% n=70

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied2%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied13%
  • Matched, unlobbied13%
Data table· 4 rows
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 10: 88 lobbied and 94 matched unlobbied applications in 38 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied88—100% (n=7)0%11%0.03
Matched, unlobbied94—100% (n=6)0%5%0.01
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 573 lobbied and 763 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied5731,925100% (n=64)0%13%0.08
Matched, unlobbied7631,79398% (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.