Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
155 Wellesley St E
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.66630, -79.37532
- How this address was located
- Matched exactly to a City of Toronto address point.
Sources: City of Toronto Lobbyist Registry, Development Applications, Committee of Adjustment Applications and Address Points (open data). Lobbyist Registry · Development Applications · Committee of Adjustment · Address Points
Email alerts · at most one a day
Registrations that mention this address
3These registrations name this address in their particulars, after the address was standardised (street type and direction abbreviations). This is a text match, not an inferred link.
Registrations by communications
Offices contacted on registrations that mention this address
Data table· 1 row
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 27 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 5 | 5 | 11 June 2018 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM24785 | Starlight Investments | 155 Wellesley Street East | Planning and Development Application, Zoning By-law | 30 June 2017 – 28 February 2018 | 0 |
| SM24716 | Starlight Group Property Holdings Inc. | 155 Wellesley St. E. | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B… | 14 June 2017 – 14 December 2019 | 2 |
| SM24696 | Starlight Group Property Holdings Inc. | 155 Wellesley St. E. | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B… | 12 June 2017 – 12 December 2018 | 3 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
2- Submitted 22 February 2018Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 18 120013 STE 27 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 29 September 2017Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 17 241044 STE 27 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 2 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18 120013 STE 27 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 22 February 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 17 241044 STE 27 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 29 September 2017 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
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
155 Wellesley St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
17 241044 STE 27 OZ · submitted 29 September 2017 · Closed · from registration SM24696 (Starlight Group Property Holdings Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.81
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 SM24696: Applications in support of redevelopment of 155 Wellesley St. E. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 17 241044 STE 27 OZ at 155 Wellesley St E: Applications for Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Rental HousingDemolition proposing the expansion and conversion of the first two storeys of an existing 18-storey, 116 unit residential rental apartment building to permit a two-storey medical facility andretail pharmacy. Alterat… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Applications in support of redevelopment of 155 Wellesley St. E.
Matched fields
- address
- 155 WELLESLEY ST E
- application_address
- 155 WELLESLEY ST E
155 Wellesley St E · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
17 241044 STE 27 OZ · submitted 29 September 2017 · Closed · from registration SM24716 (Starlight Group Property Holdings Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.82
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 SM24716: Applications in support of redevelopment of 155 Wellesley St. E. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 17 241044 STE 27 OZ at 155 Wellesley St E: Applications for Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Rental HousingDemolition proposing the expansion and conversion of the first two storeys of an existing 18-storey, 116 unit residential rental apartment building to permit a two-storey medical facility andretail pharmacy. Alterat… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Applications in support of redevelopment of 155 Wellesley St. E.
Matched fields
- address
- 155 WELLESLEY ST E
- application_address
- 155 WELLESLEY ST E
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Development 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 13
56 lobbied · 128 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide
449 lobbied · 1,236 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 56 | — | 100% (n=5) | 0% | 7% | 0.16 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 128 | — | 100% (n=8) | 0% | 2% | 0.01 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 449 | — | 100% (n=63) | 0% | 4% | 0.07 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 1,236 | — | 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.
Development 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 13
82 lobbied · 96 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), City-wide
571 lobbied · 760 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 82 | — | 100% (n=13) | 0% | 11% | 0.15 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 96 | — | 90% (n=14) | 10% | 16% | 0.08 |
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 571 | — | 100% (n=78) | 0% | 12% | 0.08 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 760 | — | 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.