Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)
Development application 18 256880 STE 27 SA
- Status
- Closed
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted
- 15 November 2018
- No appeal recorded
Application record
- Type
- Site Plan Approval (SA)
- Addresses
- 2 Bloor St E; 90 Bloor St E
- Ward
- Ward 11 · Dianne Saxe
- Submitted
- 15 November 2018
- Status
- Closed
- Outcome recorded
- Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Decision date
- Not recorded in the open data
- Appealed
- No appeal recorded
Source: City of Toronto open data (Development Applications; Committee of Adjustment Applications). Dataset page · City application page
Description
Site Plan Approval Application for a 4th floor hotel addition and elevator addition to the south façade of the existing building.
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
Larco Hospitality Inc. · registration SM27189
Site Plan Application for Larco Hospitality Inc. on Marriott Hotel site at 20-100 Bloor Street East.
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 SM27189: Site Plan Application for Larco Hospitality Inc. on Marriott Hotel site at 20-100 Bloor Street East. (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 18 256880 STE 27 SA at 2 Bloor St E: Site Plan Approval Application for a 4th floor hotel addition and elevator addition to the south façade of the existing building. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: Site Plan Application for Larco Hospitality Inc. on Marriott Hotel site at 20-100 Bloor Street East.
Matched fields
- address
- 20-100 BLOOR ST E
- application_address
- 2 BLOOR ST E
Lobbying on linked registrations
1 linked registration · 0 communications · 0 meetings · 0 offices contacted
Offices contacted
Linked registrationsNo communications recorded.
Consultant firms
Linked registrationsOther registrations that mention this application's addresses
Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.
- Brookfield Properties Canada Management LPSM37499 · 17 March 2026 · “2 Bloor Street East”
- BPG Holdings Group Inc.SM36992 · 23 September 2025 · “2 Bloor Street East”
- Larco InvestmentsSM27878 · 11 March 2019 · “90 Bloor Street East”
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.