Address · Ward 13 · Chris Moise
601 Sherbourne St
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 13 · Chris Moise
- Location
- 43.67113, -79.37611
- 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
1These 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 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 17 October 2012 |
All registrations· 1 row
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM18469 | Lifetime Developments | 601 Sherbourne Street | Planning and Development, Combined Application | 26 September 2012 – 18 April 2013 | 1 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
3- Submitted 17 April 2025Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0282/25TEYClosed · Approved
- Submitted 27 April 2018Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 18 149815 STE 28 SANOAC Issued · Approved
- Submitted 14 August 2015Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 15 206976 STE 28 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 3 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A0282/25TEY Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 17 April 2025 | Closed Approved |
| 18 149815 STE 28 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 27 April 2018 | NOAC Issued Approved |
| 15 206976 STE 28 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 14 August 2015 | 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
545 Sherbourne St · Site Plan Approval (SA)
18 149815 STE 28 SA · submitted 27 April 2018 · NOAC Issued · from registration SM22508 (Medallion Corporation Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.74
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 SM22508: 591 Sherbourne Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 149815 STE 28 SA at 545 Sherbourne St: Site Plan Control application for a 51-storey mixed use building with a GFA of 35,000 sq. m with 499 sq. m of retail space and 511 residential units, and the total number of rental units on the Block is 2057 units, of which 24 are rental replacement units (and therefore not market). The overall FSI… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 591 Sherbourne Street
Matched fields
- address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
- application_address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
583 Sherbourne St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 206976 STE 28 OZ · submitted 14 August 2015 · Closed · from registration SM22508 (Medallion Corporation Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.86
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 SM22508: 591 Sherbourne Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 206976 STE 28 OZ at 583 Sherbourne St: Redevelopment of the subject properties for a 51-storey rental building, with retail uses at grade. As part of these applications they are also proposing to reconfigure St. James Town West Park, and make significant improvements to it. The existing heritage designated building at 601 Sherbourne Str… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 591 Sherbourne Street
Matched fields
- address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
- application_address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
583 Sherbourne St · Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)
15 206976 STE 28 OZ · submitted 14 August 2015 · Closed · from registration SM23203 (Medallion Developments Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.84
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 SM23203: 591 Sherbourne Street (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 15 206976 STE 28 OZ at 583 Sherbourne St: Redevelopment of the subject properties for a 51-storey rental building, with retail uses at grade. As part of these applications they are also proposing to reconfigure St. James Town West Park, and make significant improvements to it. The existing heritage designated building at 601 Sherbourne Str… (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: 591 Sherbourne Street
Matched fields
- address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
- application_address
- 591 SHERBOURNE ST
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
Committee of Adjustment 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.
Minor variance (MV), Ward 13
5 lobbied · 76 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Minor variance (MV), City-wide
173 lobbied · 3,646 matchedMedian days
Approval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Objection rate
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 5 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 76 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Objection rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 173 | 126 | 75% (n=154) | 25% | 19% | 43% |
| Matched, unlobbied | 3,646 | 114 | 91% (n=3,058) | 9% | 4% | 27% |
Submission to hearing. 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.
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.