lobbyTO

Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 21 156080 WET 05 SA

8 Locust St; 10 Locust St; 12 Locust St; 14 Locust St; 15 Oxford Dr; 16 Locust St

Status
Final Approval Completed
Approved
Submitted
17 May 2021
No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations
1
Inferred links, published
Communications on linked registrations
7
0 meetings · 4 offices

Application record

Type
Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses
8 Locust St; 10 Locust St; 12 Locust St; 14 Locust St; 15 Oxford Dr; 16 Locust St
Ward
Ward 5 · Frances Nunziata
Submitted
17 May 2021
Status
Final Approval Completed
Outcome recorded
Approved
Decision date
Not recorded in the open data
Appealed
No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description
25,862 m² gross floor area
Related file
20 113215 WET 05 OZ

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

Description

Site plan application for a proposed 37-storey (113.9 metres) residential tower. The proposal includes a total gross floor area of 25,862 sq m and would have a Floor Space Index of 9.7 times the area of the lot.

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 · 7 communications · 0 meetings · 4 offices contacted

Offices contacted

Linked registrations
  • Transportation Services3
  • Parks, Forestry & Recreation2
  • Mayors Office1
  • Frances Nunziata1
Data table· 4 rows
OfficeOffice holder typeCommunicationsMeetingsLast contact
Transportation ServicesCity staff305 September 2023
Parks, Forestry & RecreationCity staff2021 April 2023
Mayors OfficeCouncillor staff1017 May 2023
Frances NunziataCouncillor staff102 May 2023

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.

Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 5

15 lobbied · 40 matched

Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,236 matched

Approval rate

  • Lobbied100% n=63
  • Matched, unlobbied97% n=98

Refusal rate

  • Lobbied0%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%

Appeal rate

  • Lobbied4%
  • Matched, unlobbied3%
Data table· 4 rows
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 5: 15 lobbied and 40 matched unlobbied applications in 12 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied15Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Matched, unlobbied40Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
GroupnMedian daysApproval rateRefusal rateAppeal rateCouncil items
Lobbied449—100% (n=63)0%4%0.07
Matched, unlobbied1,236—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.