Development application 18 227344 STE 28 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

• Ivanhoe Cambridge · registration SM22961

  45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications

  Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.80

  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 SM22961: 45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications (Lobbyist Registry)
  • Development application 18 227344 STE 28 SA at 141 Bay St: Phase 2 CIBC Square: Site Plan Control application for a mixed-use office development: 50-storey office tower, with a 7-storey podium on the Yonge Street Frontage (124,485 square metre) PATH bridge to Union Station and To Backstage Condo. The podium includes ancillary retail at grade and at the sec… (Development Applications)

  Matched text

  • particulars: 45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications

  Matched fields

  address

  141 BAY ST

  application_address

  141 BAY ST

• Ivanhoe Cambridge · registration SM21032

  45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications.

  Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.85

  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 SM21032: 45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications. (Lobbyist Registry)
  • Development application 18 227344 STE 28 SA at 141 Bay St: Phase 2 CIBC Square: Site Plan Control application for a mixed-use office development: 50-storey office tower, with a 7-storey podium on the Yonge Street Frontage (124,485 square metre) PATH bridge to Union Station and To Backstage Condo. The podium includes ancillary retail at grade and at the sec… (Development Applications)

  Matched text

  • particulars: 45 Bay Street, 141 Bay Street rezoning, site plan and minor variance applications.

  Matched fields

  address

  141 BAY ST

  application_address

  141 BAY ST

Lobbying on linked registrations

2 linked registrations · 2 communications · 2 meetings · 1 office contacted

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

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

• 141 Bay Street ULC
  SM25419 · 11 December 2017 · “141 Bay Street”
• 141 Bay Street ULC
  SM25422 · 11 December 2017 · “141 Bay Street”
• 141 Bay Street ULC
  SM25427 · 11 December 2017 · “141 Bay Street”
• Ivanhoe Cambridge
  SM22507 · 16 November 2015 · “141 Bay Street”
• Ivanhoe Cambridge
  SM22393 · 29 October 2015 · “141 Bay Street”
• Ivanhoe Cambridge
  SM22431 · 29 October 2015 · “141 Bay Street”
• Ivanhoe Cambridge
  SM20452 · 15 May 2014 · “141 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.

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.