Development application · Site Plan Approval (SA)

Development application 20 198309 STE 13 SA

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

Status: Under Review; In progress
Submitted: 24 September 2020; No appeal recorded
Linked lobbying registrations: 0; None published
Communications on linked registrations: 0

Application record

Type: Site Plan Approval (SA)
Addresses: 166 Dundas St E; 202 Jarvis St
Ward: Ward 13 · Chris Moise
Submitted: 24 September 2020
Status: Under Review
Outcome recorded: In progress
Decision date: Not recorded in the open data
Appealed: No appeal recorded
Size stated in the description: 52,502 m² gross floor area
Related file: 18 271373 STE 13 OZ

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

Description

INACTIVE Site Plan Control application for a 44-storey (plus mechanical) development comprised of a 13-storey institutional base building (plus mechanical) which accommodates instructional space, research space, departmental offices, and student food services, with retail and institutional service use at grade, above which a 44-storey tower hosts a Ryerson University owned and operated student residence. The development totals 52,502 m2 of gross floor area, including 35,569 m2 of post-secondary institutional uses, 16,765 m2 of institutional student residence uses, and 168 m2 of retail uses. There are 2,848 m2 of indoor amenity uses..

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.

None.

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=7

Refusal rate

Lobbied0%
Matched, unlobbied0%

Appeal rate

Lobbied7%
Matched, unlobbied2%

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide

449 lobbied · 1,237 matched

Median days

Lobbied—
Matched, unlobbied727

Approval rate

Lobbied100% n=61
Matched, unlobbied97% n=96

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=7)	0%	2%	0.01

Site Plan Approval (SA), City-wide: 449 lobbied and 1,237 matched unlobbied applications in 307 matched strata
Group	n	Median days	Approval rate	Refusal rate	Appeal rate	Council items
Lobbied	449	—	100% (n=61)	0%	4%	0.07
Matched, unlobbied	1,237	727	97% (n=96)	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.