Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 19 262878 STE 13 SA

28 Selby St; 387 Bloor St E; 395 Bloor St E; 401 Bloor St E; 403 Bloor St E

Ward 13 · Chris MoiseDataset pageCity application pageReport an error on this page

Status: Closed; Closed (outcome not recorded)
Submitted: 18 December 2019; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 28 Selby St; 387 Bloor St E; 395 Bloor St E; 401 Bloor St E; 403 Bloor St E
Ward: Ward 13 · Chris Moise
Submitted: 18 December 2019
Status: Closed
Outcome recorded: Closed (outcome not recorded)
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 508 units
Related file: 15 259835 STE 27 SA

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

Description

Site Plan Amendment application to increase the height of the building to 55-storeys, and to increase the residential gross floor area to 44,000 m². A total of 508 residential units are now proposed on the lot.

Linked lobbying registrations

No published lobbying registrations are linked to this application.

Other registrations that mention this application's addresses

Text matches on the address only. They are not linked to this application unless listed above.

Easton's Group of Hotels
SM23372 · 21 July 2016 · “28 Selby Street”
1293446 Ontario Inc.
SM20904 · 24 September 2014 · “28 Selby St.”
Lifetime Developments
SM20030 · 27 January 2014 · “28 Selby Street”
2262814 Ontario Ltd.
SM19487 · 2 July 2013 · “28 Selby Street”
A member of the Great Gulf Group of Companies
SM18832 · 11 January 2013 · “387 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 13

56 lobbied · 128 matched

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=5
Matched, unlobbied100% n=8

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied7%
Matched, unlobbied2%

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 13: 56 lobbied and 128 matched unlobbied applications in 32 matched strata
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

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,236 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
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.