Address · Ward 21 · Michael Thompson
1001 Ellesmere Rd
About this address
- Ward
- Ward 21 · Michael Thompson
- Location
- 43.76611, -79.27746
- 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
3These 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· 3 rows
| Office | Office holder type | Communications | Meetings | Last contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ward 21 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 5 | 0 | 16 December 2021 |
| Ward 37 Scarborough Centre | Member of council | 2 | 2 | 22 August 2018 |
| Councillor Michael Thompson | Councillor staff | 1 | 0 | 5 October 2021 |
All registrations· 3 rows
| Registration | Client | As written | Subject matter | Dates | Communications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SM32037 | Goldman Group, The | 1001 Ellesmere Road | Planning and Development; Combined Application | 13 July 2021 – 22 June 2027 | 3 |
| SM30967 | Goldman Ellesmere 2 Developments Inc. | 1001 Ellesmere Road | Planning and Development Application, Official Plan; Planning and Development Application, Zoning B… | 1 December 2020 – 30 November 2024 | 3 |
| SM26608 | Mattamy Homes Limited | 1001 Ellesmere Road | Building Permits | 21 August 2018 – 11 December 2020 | 2 |
Development and Committee of Adjustment applications at this address
10- Submitted 10 July 2023Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 23 172257 ESC 21 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 31 August 2022Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 22 197994 ESC 21 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 27 August 2019Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)Development application 19 212579 ESC 21 CDClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 8 June 2018Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 18 174513 ESC 37 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 8 June 2018Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)Development application 18 174528 ESC 37 PLClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 5 December 2016Minor variance (MV)Committee of Adjustment application A0362/16SCClosed · Approved
- Submitted 31 July 2015Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 15 200160 ESC 37 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 20 November 2013Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ)Development application 13 268032 ESC 37 OZClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 20 November 2013Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB)Development application 13 268033 ESC 37 SBClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
- Submitted 16 July 2013Site Plan Approval (SA)Development application 13 205063 ESC 37 SAClosed · Closed (outcome not recorded)
Data table· 10 rows
| Application | Type | Submitted | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| 23 172257 ESC 21 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 10 July 2023 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 22 197994 ESC 21 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 31 August 2022 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 19 212579 ESC 21 CD Development application | Draft Plan of Condominium (CD) | 27 August 2019 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 18 174513 ESC 37 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 8 June 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 18 174528 ESC 37 PL Development application | Part Lot Control Exemption (PL) | 8 June 2018 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| A0362/16SC Committee of Adjustment application | Minor variance (MV) | 5 December 2016 | Closed Approved |
| 15 200160 ESC 37 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 31 July 2015 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 268032 ESC 37 OZ Development application | Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ) | 20 November 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 268033 ESC 37 SB Development application | Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB) | 20 November 2013 | Closed Closed (outcome not recorded) |
| 13 205063 ESC 37 SA Development application | Site Plan Approval (SA) | 16 July 2013 | 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
1001 Ellesmere Rd · Part Lot Control Exemption (PL)
23 172257 ESC 21 PL · submitted 10 July 2023 · Closed · from registration SM30967 (Goldman Ellesmere 2 Developments Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.78
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 SM30967: For the property with municipal address: 1001 Ellesmere Road Toronto, Ontario Development Application discussion with the city staff and Councillor (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 23 172257 ESC 21 PL at 1001 Ellesmere Rd: Part Lot Control exemption is requested to allow for the division of the property for the creation of twenty-four (24) freehold townhouse units comprised of three (3) buildings. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: For the property with municipal address: 1001 Ellesmere Road Toronto, Ontario Development Application discussion with the city staff and Councillor
Matched fields
- address
- 1001 ELLESMERE RD
- application_address
- 1001 ELLESMERE RD
1001 Ellesmere Rd · Draft Plan of Condominium (CD)
19 212579 ESC 21 CD · submitted 27 August 2019 · Closed · from registration SM30967 (Goldman Ellesmere 2 Developments Inc.)
Evidence Moderate confidence · score 0.82
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 SM30967: For the property with municipal address: 1001 Ellesmere Road Toronto, Ontario Development Application discussion with the city staff and Councillor (Lobbyist Registry)
- Development application 19 212579 ESC 21 CD at 1001 Ellesmere Rd: Condominium application to establish common roadway to provide access to rear garages and Jolly Way. (Development Applications)
Matched text
- particulars: For the property with municipal address: 1001 Ellesmere Road Toronto, Ontario Development Application discussion with the city staff and Councillor
Matched fields
- address
- 1001 ELLESMERE RD
- application_address
- 1001 ELLESMERE RD
Council and committee items naming this address
None.
Comparison with similar applications
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.
Part Lot Control Exemption (PL), Ward 21
1 lobbied · 1 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Part Lot Control Exemption (PL), City-wide
2 lobbied · 6 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 2 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 6 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.
Site Plan Approval (SA), Ward 21
10 lobbied · 44 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 10 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 44 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.
Draft Plan of Condominium (CD), City-wide
28 lobbied · 95 matchedApproval rate
Refusal rate
Appeal rate
Data table· 2 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 28 | — | 100% (n=3) | 0% | 0% | 0.04 |
| Matched, unlobbied | 95 | — | 100% (n=6) | 0% | 0% | 0.03 |
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.
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 21
3 lobbied · 48 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 | 3 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | 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.
Official Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment (OZ), Ward 21
15 lobbied · 21 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
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 | 15 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 21 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| 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.
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.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), Ward 21
1 lobbied · 1 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Draft Plan of Subdivision (SB), City-wide
16 lobbied · 48 matchedHidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group.
Data table· 4 rows
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 1 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Group | n | Median days | Approval rate | Refusal rate | Appeal rate | Council items |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lobbied | 16 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
| Matched, unlobbied | 48 | Hidden: fewer than 20 applications in the lobbied or the matched unlobbied group. | ||||
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.