lobbyTO

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

Development application 13 254795 STE 20 OZ

604 R Richmond St W; 604 Richmond St W; 608 Richmond St W; 610 Richmond St W; 612 Richmond St W; 614 Richmond St W; 616 Richmond St W; 618 Richmond St W

Status
Closed
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted
22 October 2013
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
2
0 meetings · 2 offices

Application record

Type
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
Addresses
604 R Richmond St W; 604 Richmond St W; 608 Richmond St W; 610 Richmond St W; 612 Richmond St W; 614 Richmond St W; 616 Richmond St W; 618 Richmond St W
Ward
Ward 10 · Ausma Malik
Submitted
22 October 2013
Status
Closed
Outcome recorded
Closed (outcome not recorded)
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description
218 units

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

Description

To demolish existing residential and commercial buildings located on 604,606,610,614,616,&618 Richmond ST W (1.13 ha site) and construct a new 14-storey mixed use building containing commercial uses at grade and 218 residential units above the ground floor. The total proposed residential GFA is ~15000 m2 and the total proposed non-residential retail GFA is ~450 m2. The proposal includes 4 1/2 level of below grade parking spaces including 117 residential parking spaces, 10 visitor parking spaces.

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

1 linked registration · 2 communications · 0 meetings · 2 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Councillor Cressy1
  • Joe Cressy1
Data table· 2 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Councillor CressyCouncillor staff1022 January 2015
Joe CressyCouncillor staff1019 January 2015

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=7

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied10%
  • Matched, unlobbied5%

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

571 lobbied · 760 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=78
  • Matched, unlobbied96% n=78

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied4%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied12%
  • Matched, unlobbied14%
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%10%0.03
Matched, unlobbied94—100% (n=7)0%5%0.01
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide: 571 lobbied and 760 matched unlobbied applications in 344 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied571—100% (n=78)0%12%0.08
Matched, unlobbied760—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.