Development application · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
Development application 15 132277 STE 27 CD
984 Bay St; 990 Bay St; 1000 Bay St
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 25 March 2015
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
- Addresses
- 984 Bay St; 990 Bay St; 1000 Bay St
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 25 March 2015
- 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
- 458 units
- Related file
- 11 318491 STE 27 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page
Description
This Plan of Condominium application is for a standard condominium containing 458 residential units and 124 parking spaces. These units are part of a 32 storey tower, as approved by the OMB.
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
1000 Bay Street Limited · registration SM19694
1000 Bay St.
Evidence High confidence · score 0.94
A model scored this link 0.9 or higher out of 1. Links are not checked by a person; links scored this high are usually right but can be wrong.
Source records
- Registration SM19694: 1000 Bay St. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 132277 STE 27 CD at 984 Bay St: This Plan of Condominium application is for a standard condominium containing 458 residential units and 124 parking spaces. These units are part of a 32 storey tower, as approved by the OMB. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 1000 Bay St.
Matched fields
- address
- 1000 BAY ST
- application_address
- 1000 BAY ST
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 2 communications · 1 meeting · 1 office contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Councillor Wong-Tam | Councillor staff | 2 | 1 | 9 December 2014 |
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- 1000 Bay Street LimitedSM17809 · 15 February 2012 · “1000 Bay Street”
- Zack BhatiaSM15344 · 3 November 2010 · “1000 Bay Street”
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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), Ward 11
4 lobbied · 10 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 4 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 10 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.