Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 16 182137 STE 20 SA
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Approved
- Submitted
- 28 June 2016
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 316 Bloor St W
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 28 June 2016
- Status
- NOAC Issued
- Outcome recorded
- Approved
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
- Size stated in the description
- 499 units
- Related file
- 15 108641 STE 20 OZ
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site Plan application for a 36-storey mixed use building including at grade commercial space and 499 residential units.
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
316 Bloor West Toronto Developments Ltd. · registration SM22911
Request zoning changes for 316 Bloor St West, Toronto
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.72
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 SM22911: Request zoning changes for 316 Bloor St West, Toronto (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 16 182137 STE 20 SA at 316 Bloor St W: Site Plan application for a 36-storey mixed use building including at grade commercial space and 499 residential units. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Request zoning changes for 316 Bloor St West, Toronto
Matched fields
- address
- 316 BLOOR ST W
- application_address
- 316 BLOOR ST W
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 3 communications · 2 meetings · 2 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsData table· 2 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina | Member of council | 2 | 1 | 24 April 2017 |
| Ward 11 University-Rosedale | Member of council | 1 | 1 | 26 November 2019 |
Other registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- State Building GroupSM35261 · 29 January 2024 · “316 Bloor Street West”
- State Building GroupSM35219 · 17 January 2024 · “316 Bloor Street West”
- State Building GroupSM20213 · 26 March 2014 · “316 Bloor Street West”
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 11
46 lobbied · 113 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 | 46 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 9% | 0.09 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 113 | — | 100% (n=11) | 0% | 2% | 0.02 |
| 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.